On Sat, Nov 18, 2017 at 04:25:08PM +0530, Arvind Yadav wrote:
> The platform_get_irq() function returns negative if an error occurs.
> zero or positive number on success. platform_get_irq() error checking
> for zero is not correct.
>
> Signed-off-by: Arvind Yadav <arvind.yadav.cs@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> changes in v2:
> Return keypad->irq insted of -ENXIO.
> changes in v3 :
> Add failure case '<= 0' instead of '< 0'. IRQ0 is not valid.
>
> drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c b/drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c
> index f77b295..01788a7 100644
> --- a/drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c
> +++ b/drivers/input/keyboard/ep93xx_keypad.c
> @@ -257,8 +257,8 @@ static int ep93xx_keypad_probe(struct platform_device *pdev)
> }
>
> keypad->irq = platform_get_irq(pdev, 0);
> - if (!keypad->irq) {
> - err = -ENXIO;
> + if (keypad->irq <= 0) {
> + err = keypad->irq;
Argh, so what will happen if you return with keypad->irq == 0? Can you
please stop and consider what exactly you are doing before churning
patches like crazy?
> goto failed_free;
> }
>
> --
> 2.7.4
>
Thanks.
--
Dmitry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-input" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
